IFLA Journal

http://ifl.sagepub.com/

IFLA Journal

http://ifl.sagepub.com/content/22/3/240 The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/034003529602200312 1996 22: 240 IFLA Journal

Yasar Tonta

Scholarly Communication and the Use of Networked Information Sources

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of:

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions

can be found at:

IFLA Journal Additional services and information for

http://ifl.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://ifl.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

http://ifl.sagepub.com/content/22/3/240.refs.html Citations:

What is This?

- Jan 1, 1996 Version of Record

>>

240

Scholarly Communication and the

Use of Networked Information

Sources

Yasar Tonta

Yasar Tonta is an Associate Professor at the

Department

^of

Library

^{Science of}

Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

^where he teaches courses on computers ^and

information;

management of information

technology;

information systems

design;

and information retrieval systems. ^{Prior to this he worked}

briefly

^{as a librarian at the} Turkish and International Children’s Center. He received his

graduate degrees

ⁱⁿ

library

^and

information studies from the

University

of California ^at

Berkeley (Ph.D.),

^the

University

^of Wales

(M.Lib.)

^{and the}

University

^of

Hacettepe (M.A.).

^{His works} appear ^{in a} number of

professional journals including Libri, Library

^Resources and Technical Services, Public Access

Computer Systems,

^and Information

Development.

^{He is} editor of Türk

Kütüphaneciligi,

^a

quarterly journal published by

the Turkish Librarians’ Association and a

member of the IFLA

Standing

^{Committee on} Education and

Training.

^{Mr. Tonta can} be contacted at Hacettepe

University, Department

^of

Library

^{Science, 06532}

Beytepe,

^Ankara

(e-mail: tonta@hun.edu.tr).

Introduction

The

history

^{of the use of} electronic mail

by

^{the aca-}

demic

community

goes back to the

early

^1970s.

Parallel

publication

of both the electronic and

print

versions of the same

journals

^{started with the ACS}

(American

^Chemical

Society)

^{in 1983 when it offered}

the full-text of its

journals through

BRS, ^a commercial online information services company. Yet,

publishing

^via

Internet and related academic networks &dquo;took off&dquo; in 1990 after the &dquo;cold fusion&dquo; controversy of ^{1989.’ The}

use of networks ^{as a} medium of

publication

^has

proliferated

^since then. The fifth edition of the

Directory

of Electronic

Journals,

Newsletters and Academic Discussion Lists,

compiled by

^{a team headed}

by

^Diane

Kovacs and

published by

^the Association of Research

Libraries,

contains entries for

&dquo;nearly

²⁵⁰⁰

scholarly

lists and 675 electronic

journals, newsletters,

^and related titles such ^as

newsletter-digests -

^{an increase in}

size of over 40% since the 4th edition of

April

¹⁹⁹⁴

and 4.5 times since the 1 st edition

of July

¹⁹⁹¹

Although

the number of electronic

journals

^and

newsletters available

through

the network increased

tremendously

^over the last several _years, the use of networks as a means of

publishing scholarly

articles has

not been

accepted readily by

the academic

community.

Schouderl conducted a survey ⁱⁿ the second half of 1992 and found that scientists used networks

mainly

^for

electronic mail.

Only

^{a small}

proportion (7%)

^of scholars used networks to obtain information or

publish

articles

therein,

^{and the}

majority

of them would

prefer

to read the

printed copies

of articles. Most scholars tend

to be

sceptical

^{about the virtues} of electronic

publishing

as the medium &dquo;still

widely perceived

^as unfit for serious

scholarship,

^{more like a}

global graffiti

bound for trivial

pursuit&dquo;.4

Stoller shares similar views in his

comparison

of electronic

journals

^and

print journals:

The electronic

journal

^{is a}

hybrid.

^It

springs

^from

an effort to merge the

informality, speed,

^and

relative

cheapness

of network communication with the durable

scholarship

^{of the}

print

^{world. In}

some

degree,

^{it is a}

hopeless ^endeavor,

^because

the two components ^{are so} very different and indeed

contradictory.

^{How does one}

inject durability

^{into an} electronic medium that is

by

nature transient or

bring speed

^and

cheapness

^to

a print format that has become

incurably

cumbersome and

expensive?

^... But, ^if the electronic

journals

^{fail to achieve some form of}

formality

^{of their} print cousins,

they

will also fail

to make a

lasting

contribution to

scholarship.’

Schaffnerb reaches similar conclusions and

points

^out that in order for electronic

journals

^{to be}

accepted

^as

the medium of choice for

publishing

^articles

they

^must

&dquo;meet the basic needs that

print journals do,

^that

they

will

initially

maintain many of the features of traditional print

journals,

^{that their} transformation _may be driven

by

^external

forces,

^{and that}

they

^{will be slow in}

reaching

their full

potential&dquo;.

Lynch’

^{observes that} network-based electronic

scholarly

communication is

currently supported by

^{a few}

professional

^{societies such as ACS and the American}

Mathematical

Society (AMS)

^{and some} other &dquo;difficult-to- characterize&dquo;

organizations

^{such as} OCLC and the presence of the traditional

print publishers

^is yet ^{to be} felt in the field of

scholarly

electronic communication as

they

^{commit few} resources. One of the reasons is eco-

nomics. The new system ^of

scholarly

communication

offers a

plethora

^{of economic models}

ranging

^from

charging by

^{item or}

subscription

^or combination of both

to individual ^or institutional licenses to

encrypted keys.

Traditional

print publishers

^are

probably

^not

going

^{to be}

overly

enthusiastic about electronic

scholarly

^communi-

cation unless the economics of the system ^is resolved to

their satisfaction. Even

though,

^as

Singleton8 indicates,

the traditional

print publishers

^{receive most of their}

journal

^{material in} electronic form from

authors, they

will not

migrate

^their

publications

^to the electronic form unless

they

^{are certain that}

they

^can get &dquo;an

extended,

or

perhaps indefinite, period

^of

parallel publishing&dquo;

rights.

241

Singleton

^also

points

^{out that as}

long

^as &dquo;... the

marginal

^{cost of}

producing

^and

distributing

paper

copies ^{remains a small}

proportion

^of the total cost,

relatively

^{few cost}

savings

^{can be}

expected

^{from such}

systems&dquo;.9

^This

explains

^{to some extent}

why

print

publishers

^{are reluctant to switch from}

print

^{to electronic} form. It also

explains why they currently

^{tend to see}

parallel publishing simply

^{as an} alternative distribution medium to reach a wider audience and

they

^will

continue to offer the electronic alternative as

long

^as

they

^{continue to earn at} least the same amount of money from the

hard-copy subscriptions.

It appears then that

print publishers

^{are not}

going

^to

change

^their

practices easily

^unless

they

^{know that}

they

^can get ^a

good

^{return on their} investments.

Financial hazards of moving ^{from a}

subscription

^base

to a somewhat different economic model is not the

only

obstacle before the full

implementation

of network-based

scholarly

electronic communication. In addition to economic and motivational factors

(e.g.,

^{lack of}

incentives), technology plays

^an important

(and, currently,

^somewhat

inhibiting)

^{role in the}

development

of electronic

journals.

Telecommunication networks of

today

^are

simply inadequate

^{to transmit a}

large

^amount

of non-textual information. For instance, ^it may take several minutes to transmit a

single

^color

picture

^when the network is

busy.

^Yet multimedia information in the form of

graphics,

pictures, sound and video ^can be

extremely important

for research in some fields

(e.g.,

scientific

visualization).

^{It is}

highly unlikely

that network- based

scholarly

electronic communication

lacking

^such

visual information can

easily

be selected as the medium of choice

by

^{most academics}

publishing

ⁱⁿ those fields.

Moreover, ^{it is almost}

impossible

^{to transmit}

high quality

video

through

^{the current networks as it demands a}

large

^{amount of}

bandwidth,

^{not to mention}

interactivity.

As

King

points ^out:

... research _papers will have motion simulations

or

video,

^{with sound. We are}

going

^{to see the}

reverse of what we have now.

Presently

^the

online version of a

journal

^{refers to the}

print

version for the

figures

and illustrations. Seven to ten years from _now, it will be the print version, which refers to the electronic one for

moving

illustrations and sound. At that

point

^the electronic version will be the definitive one - the

one that must be archived.’°

It becomes clear then that

scholarly

^electronic

communication needs to be much

improved

^{before it}

becomes the medium of choice for most academics to

publish scholarly

^articles

through

the network.

Even

eliminating

^the

technological

^barriers

altogether

will not be sufficient to

fully implement

^a

scholarly

electronic communication environment. Stoller discusses the

implications

^{of such issues as the nature of the}

medium, library

^access and archival

responsibilities

^and

stresses that:

No

journal, scholarly

^or

otherwise,

would wish

to limit its audience to those

possessing

^a

particular technological capacity

any ^more

complex

^and

expensive

^{than the}

ownership

^{of a}

mailbox or the

ability

^{to walk into a}

library.

However

ubiquitous

computer networks will be ^to future

generations

^of

scholars,

any

journal

^whose

audience is limited to those

participating personally

^{in the networks is limited to a small}

subset of the current

scholarly community, particularly

for the humanities...&dquo;.

Stoller’s comments show to some extent

that, despite

the

proliferation

^of

well-designed

^user interfaces to

networked information _sources,

printed

copies ^continue

to be

preferred by

^{scholars in some}

disciplines

^as

print journals

^{have the easiest user} interface. Stoller also

predicts

^that &dquo;... the individual

subscription

^{structure that}

has

predominated

^{on the networks to date}

simply

^will

not allow electronic

journals

^{to take a central}

place

ⁱⁿ

the world of

scholarly

communication&dquo; as &dquo;... most

scholars

actually

^{subscribe to and}

routinely

^examine just

a handful of

journals, making only

occasional use of others&dquo;. 12

Singleton points

^{out that the route to}

fully

^electronic

scientific communication is littered with

pitfalls

^{such as}

incomplete networks, questions

^of

control, copyright,

and unfixed

price

^issues.13

Lynch

^{foresees that:}

...some of these network-based electronic

communication processes will survive and _grow, at least ^{as a}

supplement

^{to the}

existing

print- based system. ^{We do not} yet understand

fully

what the

transfigured

system ^of

scholarly

communication will be. It is

virtually

^certain,

however,

^{that some} elements of the existing print

publishing

processes

(perhaps

^much

changed)

will be

brought forward,

^{but it is not essential} that

publishing,

^{as we view it, be}

fully

^and

faithfully transported

^{into the electronic}

environment.’4

So far we have

briefly

summarized the

development

of network-based

scholarly

electronic communication

and discussed some of the

problems

that need to be resolved.

Despite

the fact that there are many issues ^to be addressed in this _area, it is

encouraging

^{to see a}

large

^number of electronic

journals

^{that are}

actually

^run

by

academics. These titles _range from

&dquo;barely

moderated bulletin boards to

fully

refereed electronic

journals&dquo;.15 Among

the refereed

journals

^{are Online}

Journal of ^Current Clinical

Trials,

Electronic Journal of Communication, The Public-Access

Computer Systems

Review,

EJournal,

Postmodern

Culture,

Journal of Fluids

Engineering,

^{Journal of}

Geography

^and

Mathematics,

Nuclear

Physics Report,

^and

Psycoloquy.

^{Some of these}

journals

^are offered free of

charge

while others can be obtained via

subscription.

In addition to the ones cited in this _paper, several articles and

bibliographies, published

ⁱⁿ electronic form

as well as in

print journals,

^{can be found in the}

literature of

scholarly

electronic communication

through

the networks. 10-23 There also is a discussion list on

electronic

journals (hyperiournal~mailbase.ac.uk).

Yet,

242

research on networked information ^sources and their

use in

scholarly

communication is scarce. In this

article,

we examine the

impact

of networked information

sources on

scholarly

communication

by

^{means of}

citation data available

through

the footnotes and

bibliographies

of articles

published

ⁱⁿ

print journals.

Scholarly

Communication and the Use of Networked Information Sources

Schauder defines &dquo;electronic

publishing&dquo;

^{as the}

&dquo; [d] issemi nation

^and

archiving

of full-text

professional

articles via computer storage media

(e.g.,

magnetic ^or

optical disks).

^{Access is}

through

computers ^{in stand} alone mode

and/or

^{connected to} communication

networks&dquo;. 14 Schauder’s definition can to some extent

be used for &dquo;networked information&dquo; as well since

&dquo;networked information&dquo; is also

disseminated,

^archived and accessed in the same manner.

Lynch

^enumerates

&dquo;networked information sources&dquo;:

... documents - text, images, ^or

compound

^multi-

media

objects -

^{stored on network}

^hosts,

^{as well}

as data

files, databases, objects

^{stored in}

databases,

interactive services, newsgroups, LISTSERV

lists,

interactive information retrieval services, electronic ^sensor

feeds, and, hopefully,

new electronic information resources and formats yet ^{to be}

developed.25

The term &dquo;networked information sources&dquo; is used in its

broadest sense in this _paper and covers all of the above.

Method

In

January

1995, ^a survey ^was conducted in order to

find out how

heavily,

^{if at} all networked information

sources are cited in

scholarly print journals published

ⁱⁿ

1993 and 1994. First,

printed journals

^that

publish

^the

most influental _papers, and thus

consistently

^{rank at the}

top ^{in terms} of their

impact factors,

^{were identified}

through

^{the Science Citation} Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal ^Citation

Reports (1990-1993), regularly published by

^ISI

(Institute

for Scientific

Information).

^{A total of 27}

print journals representing

^a wide _range of

subjects (Chemistry, Engineering, Sociology,

^{Social Science,}

Library

^& Information Science, ^and

Business)

^{were selected. The}

following journals

^{ranked at the} top ^{in their}

respective

^fields

during

^the

period

^{of 1990-1993:}

. Gen.

Chemistry:

^Accounts of Chemical

Research,

Chemical Reviews,

Angewandte ^Chemie,

^{J. of the}

Amer. Chem.

Society.

.

Engineering:

Combustion and

Flame,

^Combustion

Science &

Technology,

International J. for Numerical Methods in

Engineering.

International J. of

Engineering

^Science.

~

Sociology:

^Amer.

Sociological ^Ref.,

^{J. of}

Marriage

^&

Family,

^{Amer. J. of}

Sociology, Sociology, Ethology

and

Sociobiology

~ Soc. Science: Research in

Organizational ^Behavior,

J. of Sex

Research, Daedalus,

^{J. of Conflict}

Resolution,

^{Social Science Research}

~ Lib. & lnfo. Sci: J. of ^Amer. Soc. for Info. Science, Annual Ref. of Info. Science &

Technology, College

& Research

Libraries,

^J. of Documentation,

Library

Resources & Technical Services

~ Business: 1. of Consumer

Research, Academy

^of

Management

^J., Administrative Science

Quarterly,

Harvard Business Review

Since the present

study

^{aims to find out the state of the}

art of the use of networked information sources in

scholarly

communication, ^we examined

only

^{the last two}

volumes

(1993

^and

1994)

^{of each}

journal.

^{Two articles}

for each volume ^were chosen. ^In other

words,

^{a total of} four articles

representing

^each

journal

^{were selected.}

One of the articles came from the first issue and the other ^one from the last issue of each volume. The _very first article in each issue was chosen for further

examination. Items such as

editorials, prefaces, presidential addresses,

^{etc. were not taken into account.}

A total of 97 articles

[Note:

^Some

journals

^were

published annually,

^e.g., Annual Review of Information Science and

Technology,

^{Research on}

Organizational Behaviorl.

^{Some others were not on} the shelves in the

library

^{at the time our} survey ^was conducted in

January

1995. First or last issues of a

given

volume for some

journals

^{were not}

always

available. In such instances

we used the

following

^or

preceding

^issues.

Therefore,

the total number of ^{articles is}

equal

^{to 97}

(instead

^of

108).

^We

believe, however,

^{that the} effect of this variance would be

negligible

and that such minor

changes

^{would not bias our}

sample.]

^{were examined in}

order to determine if their

bibiographies

^included

references to networked information sources.

Footnotes, ^{notes and the}

bibliography

of each article selected for further examination were checked to

determine if

they

^contained references to networked information sources such as electronic

journals,

^elec-

tronic mail and

ftp archives,

messages ^to electronic discussion

lists, personal

communication and un-

published

manuscript.

Findings

Table 1

provides

statistical data on our

findings.

^{As the}

table

shows,

^{out of a total of 97}

articles, only

^two

contained direct references to networked information

sources. One of those

articles, published

ⁱⁿ the Journal of the American

Society

^for Information Science in

1994, ^{was on}

publishing

and the author reviewed the

current

developments

ⁱⁿ

publishing

^and cited the Public- Access

Computer Systems

^{Review, a} refereed electronic

journal.

^The

print

^{versions of some} other electronic

243

journals

^{such as Wired, Online} Journal of Current Clinical Trials and Internet

Society

^{News were also}

mentioned in that article. The second

article, published

in Daedalus in 1993, ^{contained a} direct reference to an

electronic mail _message ^{sent to a} discussion list.

Apart

^{from the two} references to networked information ^sources mentioned

above,

^{we identified}

seven references to private communications, ¹³ references to

unpublished manuscripts,

^two references to

lab

results,

^{and one reference to a}

working

paper.

However, ^{it was not} clear if the private communications

were in the form of electronic mail _messages.

Similarly,

we do not know if _any of those

unpublished

^manus-

cripts, ^lab

results,

^{or the}

working

paper ^were available

to others

by

^means of electronic communication

networks,

and the data ^we

gathered

^{in our} survey does

not lend itself to further statistical tests

(e.g.,

^{do citation}

types and patterns differ between ^science and social

science

journals?).

What has

clearly emerged

^{out of our survey is that}

networked information sources received a very few

citations in the

top-ranked

print

journals during

^the

period

^{of 1993-1994.}

Discussion

z

Although findings

^{of this}

study

^{are based on the last two}

years’ (1993-1994)

^{citation data of networked} information sources and the results cannot be

generalized

^{to the overall}

scholarly

^electronic

communication activities, ^{it is no} exaggeration ^to suggest ^that networked information ^sources in the form of electronic

journals

and archives get almost ^no

citations in print

journals

^{at all. This is a most}

surprising finding

of the present

study

^{as, at the}

beginning

^{of our}

research,

^we

expected

^{to find more citations to}

networked information sources that are available

through

^{the network}

by

^means of electronic

mail, ftp, gopher

^{and WWW}

protocols.

Although

methods used in two studies

differ,

^our

findings,

^{to some extent,} corroborate that of Schauder.’6 He used ^a questionnaire survey ^to obtain detailed data

on the

perceptions

^{of scholars}

using

electronic mail as

well as using ^{the network as a medium of}

publication

and information distribution and retrieval tool. On the other

hand,

^{we looked to see} whether scholars make

use of networked information sources in their research and whether this was reflected

through

the footnotes and

bibliographies

^of articles that

they publish

ⁱⁿ

print journals.

^{In other words,} the present

study

^{would to a}

certain extent show the difference between what scholars _say

they

do and what

they actually

^do.

As we

pointed

^out

^earlier,

Schouder 27 found that scholars used the network

mostly

^for

sending

^and

receiving electronic mail and that

only

^{a small}

proportion

^{of them}

(7%)

^said

they

used the network to

obtain information or

publish

^{articles therein. We found}

that

only

^{two out of 97 articles}

(2 %)

^did

actually

contain references to networked information sources.

However, this does not

necessarily

^mean that scholars

use the network much less

frequently.

^It just ^{means that}

citing

^networked information sources in

printed

^articles

is but one way of scholar’s using the network.

Just as our

finding surprised

^{us, such low use of the}

network

surprised Schauder,

^{too. At the}

beginning

^{of his}

research,

^Schauder

thought

of electronic

publishing

&dquo;as

a unicorn, from

writing

^to end-use of articles

proceeded

in a

’paperless

manner&dquo;’. Yet what he found and examined was a

&dquo;strong, healthy

rhinoceros&dquo; in the form of print

publishing.

^{His main} conclusion ^was that

&dquo;publication

^via

printed journals

^is

extremely electronically

assisted&dquo;.28

There _may be several reasons as to

why

^networked

information sources are cited

relatively infrequently

ⁱⁿ

print journals.

^{Some of them}

(e.g.,

^{economic and}

technological

issues, motivational factors such as lack of

incentives)

^have

already

^{been mentioned at the be-}

ginning ^{of this} paper. As ^we have seen

earlier,

electronic

publishing

^{is still in its}

infancy. Lasting

contributions to the scientific

inquiry through

the articles

published

ⁱⁿ electronic

journals

have yet ^to be made.

Hence, ^{in the} foreseeable

future,

^scholars

ought

^to

rely,

for their

research,

^{on articles}

primarily published

ⁱⁿ

print

journals.

Another reason

why

references to electronic

journals

and other networked information sources in

print journals

are scarce may be that articles

published

ⁱⁿ

electronic

journals

^{are not}

adequately

indexed and abstracted in standard reference tools. Smite 21 checked the titles in Ulrich’s International Periodicals

Directory (January 1995)

and found that

only

^{one electronic}

journal (Online

Journal of Current Clinical

Trials)

^{had its}

indexing

information listed in Ulrich’s.

Similarly,

^articles

published

ⁱⁿ electronic

journals

have yet ^to be indexed and abstracted

by

^{most A&I}

publishers.

Smith3° lists

some of the electronic

journals

^{that are covered}

by

major ^{A&I sources such as Index}

Medicus,

^Mathe- matical Reviews, ^MLA

Bibliography,

^{and Current Index}

to Journals in Education. However, Woodward3’ raises the issue of the format of

indexing

electronic

journals

and points ^{out that most of the entries are} very poor and lack ^even basic information such as URLs

(Universal

Resource

Locators).

As we have

pointed

^out

^earlier,

^{scholars seem to be}

reluctant to

publish

ⁱⁿ the network environment as

they

see the medium &dquo;unfit for serious

scholarship&dquo;. They

need assurance that their

scholarship

^{will be}

preserved

for future

generations

without intrusions, distortion ^or

destruction,

^{and that it will be}

easily

accessible. In

addition, they

^{need assurance that articles}

they publish

in electronic

journals

would get the ^same

recognition

given ^to

print journals during

^{tenure decisions.}

In

conclusion,

it appears that

although

^networked

information sources facilitate scholars’ work to a great

extent

during

the research _process, scholars have yet ^to

incorporate

^{such sources in the}

bibliographies

^{of their}

244

245

published

^{articles. It is}

highly likely

that this behavior will continue until the number of sources

published

ⁱⁿ

electronic form and made available

through

the network reaches critical mass. In order for this to

happen, technological

^and economic issues with

regards

^to

electronic

publishing

^and

networking

^{need to be}

addressed. The

integrity

^and

authenticity

^{of the}

preserved

^{copy must} be assured. Scientists should be

supported

ⁱⁿ their endeavors of

scholarly

^electronic

communication

through

the network. Such initiatives

should be

encouraged by

^the universities and other research institutions

by equipping

academics with the needed

knowledge

^{and tools and}

by recognizing

^such electronic

publishing

^{efforts as}

scholarly

activities.

:~ . :..i;. : ,; I .

References ^{... ,.}

1

Schauder, ^D. "Electronic Publishing of Professional Articles:

Attitudes of Academics and Implications ^{for the} Scholarly

Communcation Industry". Journal of American Society ^for Information Science 45(2): ^73-100 (1994).

2 Okerson, A. "New Edition of Internet Journal Directory

Available" (e-mail message posted ^to the Public-Access

Computer Systems Forum, pacs-l@uhupvml.uh.edu), ¹⁸ May

1995.

3 Schauder, op. ^cit.

4 Harnad, ^S. "Implementing ^{Peer Review on the Net:} Scientific

Quality ^{Control in} Scholarly Electronic Journals" (paper presented ^{at the} International Conference on Refereed Elec- tronic Journals in 1993; availabe ^via ftp ^{from the} following

address:

ftp://electra.cc.umanitoba.ca/e-journal/icrej93/),

^1993.

5

Stoller, ^M.E. "Electronic Journals in the Humanities: A Survey

and Critique". Library ^Trends 40(4): ^647-666 (1992).

6 Schaffner, A.C. "The Future of Scientific Journals: Lessons from the Past". Information Technology and Libraries 13(4): ^239-

247 (1994).

7 Lynch, ^C.A. "The Transformation of Scholarly Communication and the Role of the Library ^{in the} Age of Networked Information". Serials Librarian 23(3/4): ^5-20 (1993).

8 Singleton, ^A. "Electronic Journals for Everyone". Physics ^World 6(11): ^27-31 (January 1995).

9 Ibid.

’°King, ^{T.B. "The} Impact of Electronic and Networking Technologies ^{on the} Delivery ^of Scholarly Information". Serials Librarian 21: 5-13 (1991).

11Stoller, op. ^cit.

12 Ibid.

13 Singleton, op. cit.

14 Lynch, op. ^cit.

15Singleton, op. ^cit.

16

Bailey, ^C.W., Jr. "Electronic Publishing ^{on Networks: A}

Selective Bibliography ^{of Recent} Works" (data ^file updated regularly ^{and sent to} the Public-Access Computer Systems Forum, pacs-l@uhupvml.uh.edu), ^1995.

17

Graham, P.S. "Intellectual Preservation: Electronic Preservation of the Third Kind". LIBER Quarterly 4: 163-174 (1994).

18

Cohen, ^J.A. "Electronic Library ⁱⁿ Higher Education: An Overview and Status Report". Interpersonal Computing ^and Technology: ^An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century 1(1) (1993). (article ^is filed under the name cohen@ipctvlnl ^{and is}

available from listserv@guvm.georgetown.edu).

19

Michelson, ^{A and J.} Rothenberg. "Scholarly Communication and Information Technology". ^{American Archivist} 55: 236-315

(1992).

20

Kahin, ^B. "Scholarly Communication in the Network Environment: Issues of Principle, Policy ^{and Practice. Electronic} Library 10(5): ^275-286 (1992).

21 Rawlins, ^{G. J. E. "The New} Publishing: Technology’s Impact ^on the

Publishing

Industry ^{Over the Next} Decade". In: The Public- Access Computer Systems ^{Review, vol. 3, C.W.} Bailey, ^{Jr., et.}

al. (eds.). Chicago: ^{ALA, 1993}

22

Public-Access Computer Systems ^Review 2(1) (1991). ^{This is a} special ^{issue on} electronic journals.

23Bailey, ^{C.W., Jr. and D. Rooks} (eds.). "Symposium ^{on the Role} of Network-Based Electronic Resources in Scholarly

Communication and Research". Public-Access Computer Systems ^Review 2(2): ^4-60 (1991). (To ^retrieve this article in electronic form, ^{send an e-mail} message that _says "get baileyl prv2n2 f=mail" to listserv@uhupvml.uh.edu).

24Schauder, op. ^cit.

25

Lynch, ^{C.A. "A} Framework for Identifying, Locating ^and Describing Networked Information Resources" (preliminary draft, 1993).

26Schauder, op. ^cit.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

29Smith, ^A. "Electronic Journals ⁱⁿ Indexing Services". (e-mail

message ^to pacs-I ^{on 30} January 1995).

30 Ibid.

31Woodward, ^H. "Electronic Journals: ^{Issues of Access and}

Bibliographic Control" to appear ⁱⁿ Serials Review 1995 (as

cited in Smith, 1995, above).